NDAA // Current TV

The President’s Kill List | Is Mr.Obama Truly Peaceful?

Barack Obama campaigned to become the 44th president with vows to close Guantanamo,... more

BakedFresh
added this
1 day ago
|
0 comments

Reality Check: Is Georgia GOP Against NDAA Indefinite Detention or Not?

Ben Swann Reality Check takes a look how the Georgia GOP nearly passed a resolution... more

Radical_Centrist
added this
6 days ago
|
0 comments

Doubleplusungood: Adam Smith (D-WA), indefinite detention “hero” of NDAA amendment fame pushes domestic propaganda | Scholars and Rogues

If you’re not from Washington State, you might only know of Adam Smith for... more

hoosierdaddy
added this
10 days ago
|
0 comments

Police Brutality "caught on tape"

***********************READ DESCRIPTION*********************** This video was... more

Radical_Centrist
added this
10 days ago
|
21 comments

Federal Judge Strikes Down Portion of NDAA

On Wednesday, a newly appointed Federal judge, Katherine Forrest of the Southern... more

StewSteve
added this
11 days ago
|
1 comment

House Fails To Pass Amendment Scaling Back NDAA Indefinite Detention Provisions

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/house-fails-pass-amendment-scaling-back-ndaa-inde... more

woodspryte
added this
12 days ago
|
2 comments

Chris Hedges discusses the NDAA and what it could mean for journalists.

This is a very important topic, and an excellent interview. It addresses what may, or... more

ClassicalGas
added this
12 days ago
|
118 comments

NDAA Authorizes War Against Iran

By Rep. Dennis Kucinich.U.S. Representative from Ohio's 10th District... more

maasanova
added this
12 days ago
|
1 comment

Should I Vote For Ron Paul 2012? Complete Guide to Ron Paul's Stance on Every Issue

Love or hate him, Texas Congressman Ron Paul just might be the least understood... more

Radical_Centrist
added this
12 days ago
|
0 comments

The NDAA's Section 1021 Coup d'etat Foiled

The NDAA's section 1021 coup d'etat foiled

One brave judge is all that lay between us and a law that would have given the president power to detain US citizens indefinitely

On Wednesday 16 May, at about 4pm, the republic of the United States of America was drawn back – at least for now – from a precipice that would have plunged our country into moral darkness. One brave and principled newly-appointed judge ruled against a law that would have brought the legal powers of the authorities of Guantánamo home to our own courthouses, streets and backyards.

US district judge Katherine Forrest, in New York City's eastern district, found that section 1021 – the key section of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – which had been rushed into law amid secrecy and in haste on New Year's Eve 2011, bestowing on any president the power to detain US citizens indefinitely, without charge or trial, "facially unconstitutional". Forrest concluded that the law does indeed have, as the journalists and peaceful activists who brought the lawsuit against the president and Leon Panetta have argued, a "chilling impact on first amendment rights". Her ruling enjoins that section of the NDAA from becoming law.

In her written opinion, the judge noted that she had been persuaded by what the lead plaintiffs – who include Pulitzer prize-winner Chris Hedges of the Nation Institute, editor Jennifer Bolen of RevolutionTruth, Noam Chomsky, Daniel Ellsberg, co-founder of Occupy London Kai Wargalla, Days of Rage editor Alexa O'Brien, and the Icelandic parliamentarian and WikiLeaks activist Birgitta Jónsdóttir – had argued. In their testimonies (in court and by affidavit), these plaintiffs compiled a persuasive case that they had "standing" to sue because it was reasonable for them to worry that they could conceivably could be detained indefinitely under the section 1021 law because their work requires them to have contact with sources the US government might assert were "terrorists" or "associated forces" of al-Qaida.

The key claim made by the plaintiffs – of which Judge Forrest was persuaded – was that the language in section 1021 is so vague that it could sweep up anyone. The law fails to define or specify what "associated forces" or the concept of "substantial support" actually mean.

more at link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/may/17/ndaa-section-1021-coup-detat-foiledThe NDAA's section 1021 coup d'etat foiled One brave judge is all that... more

circlesquared
added this
13 days ago
|
14 comments

New National Defense Authorization Act, old NDAA, and Waffler-in-Chief Obama on the issue of indefinite detention | Scholars and Rogues

First a whole slew of politicians and a wide swath of press fall all over themselves... more

hoosierdaddy
added this
14 days ago
|
0 comments

36 Hours Left! Tell Congress to Pass the Smith-Amash Amendment to the NDAA

Thirty-six hours might not seem like much time. But we are hoping it will be just enough time for all Americans to convince our members of Congress that no president should have the authority to order the military to detain civilians without charge or trial in the United States, or put anyone in our country on trial in front of military commissions.

Using indefinite military detention of civilians here at home in the United States is unconstitutional and illegal and we do not believe it is permitted by last year's National Defense Authorization Act — but incredibly, some top members of Congress seem to think it is perfectly ok and allowed by the NDAA. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has kept himself busy in the Senate arguing that there is a war going on in your backyard and using the military to lock people up without charge or trial is a good idea. He has been more recently joined by House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), who believes in indefinite military detention without charge or trial here at home.

But now is your chance to fight back. No one should be picked up far from a battlefield and locked away without charge or trial by the military, and certainly not here in the United States itself.

Some key members of the House of Representatives are putting party differences aside and are trying to make clear that last year's law doesn't permit indefinite military detention within the United States. They can't fix the problem for the whole world right now, but they are committed to making clear that the United States is off-limits to indefinite military detention. They also want to make clear that military commissions cannot be used for civilians in the United States.

On Thursday afternoon or Friday, a bipartisan group of congressmen will offer the Smith-Amash amendment to this year's NDAA. They range from Tea Party-endorsed Republicans to senior Democrats, including Adam Smith (D-Wash.), Justin Amash (R-Mich.), Ron Paul (R-Texas), Paul Garamendi (D-Calif.), John Duncan (R-Tenn.), and many others from both parties. And a broad range of groups, from the ACLU to the Gun Owners of America to the United Methodist Church have endorsed it.

By working across party lines, the Smith-Amash amendment could pass the House of Representatives this week. But supporters of indefinite military detention are playing lots of tricks to try to defeat it. They even stuck a so-called habeas protection amendment into the NDAA, even though the habeas provision does absolutely nothing. They are so hell-bent on putting people into indefinite military detention without charge or trial that they will try to deceive even their own constituents.

But don't be fooled. You can use the next 36 hours to push the Smith-Amash amendment across the finish line to a winning vote.

Republicans and Democrats in Congress realized that the only way to fight back against indefinite military detention would be to work together on the Smith-Amash amendment. But the only way this amendment will actually pass this week is if everyone, regardless of party, emails or calls their member of Congress, and says it is time to start fixing the NDAA. It is time to pass the Smith-Amash amendment and make clear that civilians in the United States can only be imprisoned after charge and trial in our civilian courts, and not for anyone who the government decides should be locked away by the military without even being charged. Let's make the most of these 36 hours.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/36-hours-left-tell-congress-pass-smith-amash-amendment-ndaaThirty-six hours might not seem like much time. But we are hoping it will be just... more

Radical_Centrist
added this
14 days ago
|
0 comments

2012 Presidential Debate Of Alternative Parties

The Alternative Party Debate hosted by Maggie Phair Institute. Featuring: Rocky... more

JRBarilla
added this
1 month ago
|
3 comments

Top 50 Things Accomplished by President Barack Obama

1. Passed Health Care Reform: After five presidents over a century failed to create universal health insurance, signed the Affordable Care Act (2010). It will cover 32 million uninsured Americans beginning in 2014 and mandates a suite of experimental measures to cut health care cost growth, the number one cause of America’s long-term fiscal problems.

2. Passed the Stimulus: Signed $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to spur economic growth amid greatest recession since the Great Depression. Weeks after stimulus went into effect, unemployment claims began to subside. Twelve months later, the private sector began producing more jobs than it was losing, and it has continued to do so for twenty-three straight months, creating a total of nearly 3.7 million new private-sector jobs.

3. Passed Wall Street Reform: Signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) to re-regulate the financial sector after its practices caused the Great Recession. The new law tightens capital requirements on large banks and other financial institutions, requires derivatives to be sold on clearinghouses and exchanges, mandates that large banks provide “living wills” to avoid chaotic bankruptcies, limits their ability to trade with customers’ money for their own profit, and creates the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (now headed by Richard Cordray) to crack down on abusive lending products and companies.

4. Ended the War in Iraq: Ordered all U.S. military forces out of the country. Last troops left on December 18, 2011.

5. Began Drawdown of War in Afghanistan: From a peak of 101,000 troops in June 2011, U.S. forces are now down to 91,000, with 23,000 slated to leave by the end of summer 2012. According to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the combat mission there will be over by next year.

6. Eliminated Osama bin laden: In 2011, ordered special forces raid of secret compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in which the terrorist leader was killed and a trove of al-Qaeda documents was discovered.

7. Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry: In 2009, injected $62 billion in federal money (on top of $13.4 billion in loans from the Bush administration) into ailing GM and Chrysler in return for equity stakes and agreements for massive restructuring. Since bottoming out in 2009, the auto industry has added more than 100,000 jobs. In 2011, the Big Three automakers all gained market share for the first time in two decades. The government expects to lose $16 billion of its investment, less if the price of the GM stock it still owns increases.

8. Recapitalized Banks: In the midst of financial crisis, approved controversial Treasury Department plan to lure private capital into the country’s largest banks via “stress tests” of their balance sheets and a public-private fund to buy their “toxic” assets. Got banks back on their feet at essentially zero cost to the government.

9. Repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”: Ended 1990s-era restriction and formalized new policy allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military for the first time.

10. Toppled Moammar Gaddafi: In March 2011, joined a coalition of European and Arab governments in military action, including air power and naval blockade, against Gaddafi regime to defend Libyan civilians and support rebel troops. Gaddafi’s forty-two-year rule ended when the dictator was overthrown and killed by rebels on October 20, 2011. No American lives were lost.

11. Told Mubarak to Go: On February 1, 2011, publicly called on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to accept reform or step down, thus weakening the dictator’s position and putting America on the right side of the Arab Spring. Mubarak ended thirty-year rule when overthrown on February 11.

Read more....click on link check out pages 2 through five at the bottom of the article
http://www.alternet.org/story/154840/top_50_things_accomplished_by_president_barack_obama1. Passed Health Care Reform: After five presidents over a century failed to create... more

letsliveinpeace
added this
1 month ago
|
237 comments

Where Do You Stand?

How familiar are people nowadays with the current political system? Bills are being... more

revo2485
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

Everything is Just Fine!

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. Photo:... more

Progresshiv
added this
1 month ago
|
15 comments

KrisAnne Hall Reviews the National Defense Authorization Act

For more information visit KirsAnneHall.com http://youtu.be/DKbn1MdV79s

Radical_Centrist
added this
1 month ago
|
0 comments

FBI wouldn’t exclude extrajudicial killings in the US

United States Attorney General Eric Holder recently explained how the president can order the assassination of his own citizens abroad. But did his rationalization justify executions within the US? Apparently, the FBI wouldn’t exclude it.

Responding to a congressional inquiry this week on the rationale of assassinating Americans, Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Robert Mueller affirmed that he himself isn’t too clear on the what Holder explained.

The attorney general addressed an audience at Northwestern University in Chicago this week with an explanation for US President Barack Obama’s killing of three American citizens overseas last year. Alleged terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki and two other US-born citizens were executed in a drone strike last year in Yemen, a kill that the White House has been reluctant to discuss in detail until just recently. Speaking from Northwestern this week, Holder insisted, however, that the details the president acted on were "sufficient under the Constitution for the United States to use lethal force against a US citizen abroad.”

Following up on Wednesday, US Congressman Tom Graves, a Republican from Georgia, asked the FBI’s Mueller if Holder’s qualifications for an ordered kill could be applied domestically.

"I have to go back. Uh, I'm not certain whether that was addressed or not," responded an unsure Mueller.

Rep. Graves from there rephrased his inquiry, asking if, "from a historical perspective," the federal government has "the ability to kill a US citizen on United States soil or just overseas." Mueller once again suspended an explanation.

"I'm going to defer that to others in the Department of Justice," responded the director.
When prompted by Fox News to extrapolate on Mueller’s deferral, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department defaulted to Holder’s earlier address, simply repeating the attorney general’s insistence that US citizens outside of the US are fair-game for an Executive Branch-ordered assassination. Under Holder’s explanation offered at Northwestern, however, it could be inferred that even those on American soil aren’t excluded. Congress wants to know if that is the case and with the feds unsure themselves, it might mean President Obama himself has to put in his two cents so Americans know if they are eligible for one of his personalized assassination orders too.
Holder said that the US government believes an assassination on one of the country’s own can be carried out if the individual makes the criteria established under three qualifiers — the target must pose an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States, capture must be not be considered feasible and the operation would be conducted in a manner consistent with applicable law of war principles.

Under the Obama-signed National Defense Authorization Act, of course, Americans considered by the government to be involved with a group expressing hostilities towards the US can be indefinitely detained. The president and countless other politicians have openly discussed the harsh realities of the NDAA since even before Obama inked his name to it on New Year’s Eve. Now Americans know for certain that government allegations can get them in jail without a trial. Obama just needs to confirm or disconfirm that he can shoot them down in their own homes as well.

http://rt.com/usa/news/fbi-mueller-assassination-holder-193/United States Attorney General Eric Holder recently explained how the president can... more

Radical_Centrist
added this
2 months ago
|
0 comments

Martial Law by Executive Order

President Obama's National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order of... more

JRBarilla
added this
2 months ago
|
0 comments

Obama signs "Police State" legislation

You thought the NDAA was bad, you ain't seen nothin' yet. Read on:... more

R3zn8D
added this
2 months ago
|
6 comments

select your country

Community Spotlight

TAGS

tagged w/ NDAA

top videos

find current on tv

find current online

recent comments

© 2012 Current TV, LLC All Rights Reserved

the basics

follow us online

tools

stay in touch

© 2012 Current TV, LLC
All Rights Reserved